I came across these two gems:
These definitions are disturbing to me. For starters, the Federal law has no such requirements, which means that adding requirements constitutes an unacceptable and unlawful burden. Moreover, while they do allow for a similar training organization's standards, that disallows a self-trained dog, and still adds requirements that Federal law does not.
The ADI bit of issuing cards is also something I'm not big on. If this becomes expected, people with legit service dogs that don't come from them will be expected to have a card, and those without one (or who don't have it with them) will be though to be invalid or bogus. Bad precedent, IMO.
We need to be policing ourselves, AND fighting such attempts to regulate, IMO. Your thoughts?